Striving for a flattering eulogy

Menu

Proceed Sir

I suppose Barrack Obama always was the man for his time. A half-black lawyer leading a half-white America into half-African politics. I still recall so many witless conservatives apoplectic about a potential Hillary! presidency. Certainly one imagines that would have rivaled the awfulness of its Bush predecessor. Though few seemed to fathom how the alternative–an oddly-named exotic–might chafe at the gossamer strands of executive restraint. And chafe he has, almost to the extent of unburdening himself of limitations entirely.

In watching this presidential molting, one comes to realize that the contours of power in Washington are shaped as they are everywhere. Not by words on disintegrating parchment, but by will or by force. Obama’s authority expands in the absence of opposing will to temper it. The will of living men. In its failure blossoms the Law of Rule. A man’s power is not established by documents, but by the concession of those he would dominate. If one commands and others obey, then any relationship formalities are just that.

So it was interesting to watch as the head of just one of three co-equal branches of the federal government summarily cast a polyglot country of 300 million into yet another military conflict thousands of miles from our own pustuled border. In doing so Obama answered the question that must be clarified by all those seeking highest office: How would your administration bomb Iraq?

And who is charged with making declarations of war as Obama did on ISIS? Congress, of course. And, contra Bush, Obama no longer even feels compelled to seek its input. It is simply ego expanding into a vacuum. A process so egregious in this case that even devout leftist toadies have begun to croak. Sounds that will only lull Obama in his bed chambers by their impotence. Because complaining is hardly preventing. And that prevention must begin as the tip of the camel’s nose starts angling into your tent.

Let’s review some other “Betrayals of the Constitution” that New York Times writers were sanguine in regarding…

Obamacare
Any willing to invest in the research could meticulously catalogue the series of constitutional encroachments surrounding this legal abortion. Though I’m inclined rather to state only the obvious: once a law is passed in congress and signed by the president, neither party without explicit prior authorization may simply amend it ad-hoc as per their convenience. The number of waivers, extensions, delays, and modifications–all issued by extra-legal fiat–have been fairly remarkable. I honestly wonder why congress didn’t simply pass a one-word bill stating in totality: “Healthcare.” With Obama dictating particulars from that premise alone.

Federal Drug Laws
It’s irrelevant where one stands on the issue of various legalizations. There are duly enacted federal drug statutes outstanding that Obama/Holder have simply nullified. Was there the popular will to revoke these? If so, there was a process to do so. And though I am staunchly in favor of states rights and devolution of power, this is an example of neither. It was instead states being allowed to do only what Obama was inclined to allow. If any believe otherwise, let us watch the reaction if a state were to pass laws nullifying “civil rights” enforcement.

Dream Act
Ahhh, to sleep perchance to dream. We’ve discussed previously Efforts to turn America from a nation into a market. Though in the past, The State at least bound itself to process. A tedium Obama dispensed with through his 2012 non-deportation order through something called “Homeland Security.” Again I wonder at how liberals would respond to a defense of “prosecutorial discretion” as interpreted by a testicled opposition.

Welfare Work Requirement
The 1996 Clinton-signed welfare reform package was generally considered very effective. One of its key provisions was a work requirement. It was quite a draconian concept at the time: you must do something vaguely productive in exchange for receiving wealth stripped from your neighbors. The left, of course, howled. Though subsequent to its enactment welfare rolls dropped significantly. In 2012, the HHS exercised the “waiver authority” it did not possess and simply nullified that provision of the law.

Undoubtedly other examples exist. Though should he ever abdicate, the Obama presidency will have been very instructive for the perhaps 17 conservatives with sufficient faculties to take the lesson. Institutions and offices serve men, not abstractions nor words on paper. Those who win societal conflicts understand this. Those who lose do not.

So I have some indelicate advice for conservatives from victorious liberals: F the constitution. As we have seen, it’s a quite easy lay.